Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 47586
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/07/09 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
7/9     

2007/8/11-15 [Reference/Military] UID:47586 Activity:nil
8/11    Maybe the gun nuts are right?
        http://urltea.com/175y (journalinquirer.com)
        \_ [pointless off topic rude stupid troll purged]
        \_ I actually agree with the gun nuts, but that article is poor.
        \_ You just wasted 30 seconds of my time. "What if... what if..."
           This article is almost as informative and entertaining as
           Ayn Rand's crap.
           \_ The article is poorly written but it is not "What if...".  It
              attempts (poorly) to argue that since criminals already have
              guns maybe non-criminal citizens should carry them (and use
              them), too, since the government is doing a crap job of
              protecting citizens from violent repeat offenders.
2025/07/09 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
7/9     

You may also be interested in these entries...
2013/1/25-2/19 [Reference/Military] UID:54589 Activity:nil
1/25    "Cupertino Middle School on Lockdown Following Report of Man With Gun"
        http://www.csua.org/u/z26 (http://www.nbcbayarea.com
        Thank you NRA, again.
        \_ You're stretching on blaming the NRA for this one.  A student
           reports a phoney gun threat, and it's the NRA's fault because...
           why, exactly?  They've fought efforts to ban pretend guns?  Help
	...
2009/4/26-28 [Reference/Military] UID:52908 Activity:nil
4/25    Another responsible gun owner
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090425/ap_on_re_us/us_georgia_professor_shooting
        \_ But if everyone else had guns it could have turned into a raging
           gun battle and that would have been kewl because we all know
           the good guys win those.
	...
2009/4/5-13 [Reference/Military] UID:52803 Activity:kinda low
4/5     "Friends have said Poplawski was concerned about his weapons being
        seized during Barack Obama's presidency, and friends said he owned
        several handguns and an AK-47 assault rifle"
        Expect to see more of this from gun nuts.
        http://tinyurl.com/dxul6b (SF Gate)
        \_ Well, he was also a Neo-Nazi nut.
	...
2009/1/22-26 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:52438 Activity:high
1/21    One datapoint on rental prices, please post yours if applicable.
        Please don't give me this "this is why I buy a home" crap. Not
        everyone has money:
        -S Cal, $2055/month with 9 month contract expired. Signing one
         more year=$2055/month, month-to-month=$2255. Bunch of empty
         parking spots and people moving out, but according to the
	...
2008/12/16-29 [Reference/Military] UID:52260 Activity:nil
12/15   Etiquette question: Mother's boyfriend claims to have a ccw permit.
        Mother and boyfriend came over to visit family, boyfriend brought his
        9mm into the house concealed in a fanny pack without asking or informing
        anyone that he is armed.  His actual ability with the gun is completely
        unknown - he may actually even have a ccw permit.  House has a new baby
        in it and baby's mother (my gf) is strongly opposed to random guns in
	...
Cache (3990 bytes)
urltea.com/175y -> www.journalinquirer.com/site/printerFriendly.cfm?brd=985&dept_id=569380&newsid=18660461
Why not a more stringent "three strikes and you're out" law in this state? Connecticut's version is so weak that it's more like "30 strikes and we'll think about it while you strike again." Why not speed up the criminal trial process for repeat violent offenders? Can't we do a better job of predicting -- figuring out which non-violent criminals are about to turn violent? But somehow all of these ideas pale before the barbarity of this particular crime. Is it possible that it should it be revered, just like the First Amendment? Sam Ervin said, "The Constitution should be taken like mountain whiskey -- undiluted and untaxed." Is it possible that the Second Amendment is not a quaint and antiquated remnant of a world that will never return, but an idea as relevant and sound today as when it was written? Is it possible that we are not talking about the right of the government to form a militia when there is no standing army, but the right of the individual to defend himself, or herself, against both tyranny and lawlessness? Maybe we are talking about the right of self-defense -- the right of the individual to take up arms against a government that wants to oppress, be it foreign or domestic. And the right of the individual to defend himself against criminals, brutes, and barbarians when local police seem unable to stop them. Might the Second Amendment matter almost as much as the First? And just like the First, the Second is practical, newly relevant, and far wiser than the watered-down alternatives. I don't think George Bush wants to impose martial law on his fellow citizens. You have to stop and think about a government that wants to control the thoughts and behavior of its people. Should such a government be permitted to disarm them as well? And whereas the reform of the criminal justice system along some of the lines suggested above (a real "three strikes" law and faster trials for violent offenders) would not have saved the lives of Jennifer, and Hayley, and Michaela Petit, a gun might have. William Petit had access to a gun and known how to use it, he might have been able to dispatch the two perpetrators, who were armed with only an air gun and ropes. What if Mrs Hawke-Petit had been trained in the use of firearms? Suppose she had been able to get to a gun after her husband was beaten into unconsciousness by the invaders? Or when she was forced to take one captor to the bank to fetch him money? Women and children are now the major targets of predators in our society. Many professional women who work in cities know this and take courses in self-defense. A gun may be the only realistic self-defense against the sort of criminals we are talking about here. And if a few women took care of a few thugs in cases like this; if a few stories like this one ended in a different way -- with a woman blowing one of these brutes to kingdom come -- it might be a deterrent. Mind you, we are talking about arming people who are trained and know how to use a weapon. Just as one gets training in handling a boat, motorcycle, or car, one must learn how to use and safely store a gun. A second caveat: Encouraging citizens to arm themselves is no "answer" to crimes like the Petit murders. But it is one of several remedies when we are faced with palpable evil. All possible remedies should be on the table: -- Various reforms of the justice system, like a real three-strike-law for predatory offenders. None of these options "fix" a society that can produce human beings who torture and kill the defenseless for sport. No one step or program can plug every hole in America's justice system, or its soul. But there are times when a gun in the hands of a potential victim may save a life. Let's admit -- since the murderers, and druggies, and psychos, and thieves already have guns -- that arming the peaceful, law-abiding, decent, and productive people, whether in a school, or a private home, or on the way to a parked car, is an option that also has merit.